UNITED
NATIONS,
December 11 --
When the UN
Security
Council
convened for a
closed door
briefing about
Western Sahara
on December 8
from UN envoy
Christopher
Ross, Inner
City Press
exclusively
obtained a
copy of Ross'
briefing and put
online here.

Ross
said, among
other things,
"We are
concerned that
without a
referendum,
the process of
colonizing
Western Sahara
will continue
including the
deterioration
of human
rights for the
Sahrawi people
and the
illegal
exploitation
of their
natural
resources, all
of this to the
detriment of
stability and
peace in the
region."

On natural
resources, two
days later on
December 10
the European
Court of
Justice
annulled the European
Union's trade
accord with
Morocco as illegal.
Decision here,
in French.

"Personal
Envoy of the
Secretary-General
for Western
Sahara
Introduction

Madam
President,
Distinguished
Members of the
Council,
I’m pleased to
come before
you today to
report on
developments
since my last
briefing.

The
negotiating
process meant
to facilitate
a solution to
the conflict
over Western
Sahara
remains
stalemated.
Even though
the situation
in the Middle
East-North
Africa-Sahel
regions
presents real
dangers,
events have
had little if
any impact on
the positions
of the various
actors.
Meanwhile, the
refugees in
the camps near
Tindouf are
facing new
tribulations
as a result of
heavy rains
and serious
flooding.
The peoples of
the Maghreb
for their part
continue to
suffer from
the absence of
regional
integration
and
cooperation.
This has
consequences
far beyond
North Africa,
in particular
due to the
lack of joint
action on
security
issues.

After
40 years, the
need for a
solution is
more urgent
than ever, and
the
Secretary-General
has paid
increased
attention to
this
issue.
He considers
that, if left
unresolved,
this situation
may constitute
a “time-bomb”
whose effects
could spiral
well beyond
any single
actor’s
ability to
control.
He has asked
me to
intensify my
efforts.
To add his own
weight to this
process, he is
planning to
visit the
region as
early as
January.

Secretary-General’s
analysis and
intensified
efforts

Let me
turn briefly
to the main
developments
since last
April. In
June, the
Secretary-General
sent letters
to both King
Mohammed VI
and
Secretary-General
Abdelaziz
restating his
personal
commitment to
promoting
progress in
the
negotiating
process,
particularly
in light of
worrisome
developments
in the region.
He stressed
that the
situation in
North Africa
is worsening
due to threats
posed by
extremists and
terrorists
operating
beyond
borders,
growing
frustrations
among all ages
in the refugee
camps, and
increased
regional
tensions.
Among youth in
the camps, the
lack of
progress and
the absence of
employment
make them
targets for
recruitment by
extremist
groups.
In addition,
developments
in both Libya
and Mali,
whose borders
are only a few
hundred
kilometres
away from the
nearest
refugee camp,
could have an
impact in
Western Sahara
and in
Morocco, as
they already
have at In
Amenas in
Algeria.
While these
dynamics were
evident last
spring, they
have now
become even
more
pronounced.

I
have, as the
Secretary-General
requested,
intensified my
efforts to
elicit new
ideas to
explore
through
shuttle
diplomacy in
preparation
for the
resumption of
face-to-face
meetings
between the
Kingdom of
Morocco and
the Polisario
Front in the
presence of
the two
neighbouring
states,
Algeria and
Mauritania, as
observers in
accordance
with the
agreed
Manhasset
formula.
To this end, I
visited the
region three
times in
September,
October, and
November.
Unfortunately,
these efforts
have not borne
any real fruit
to date.
The Polisario
has confirmed
that it is
ready to
resume
face-to-face
talks even in
the absence of
new
ideas.
Morocco
remains
unready to do
so without
significant
preparation
through
shuttle
diplomacy.

During
my visit to
Rabat in
September, my
interlocutors
questioned the
Secretary-General’s
assessment
that rapid
progress in
the
negotiations
is needed to
face the
potential
dangers that
the region
faces.
In Morocco’s
view, the
situation
remains under
control, and
the focus
should remain
on an
unhurried and
“serene”
negotiating
process.

In
this regard,
Morocco set
forth its own
definition of
the purpose of
the
process.
As the
Secretary-General
of the Foreign
Ministry
stated in
September, the
basis of the
process must
remain what he
calls the
“2004
understanding”.
According to
this purported
understanding,
what the
Council has
intended in
calling for a
“political
solution” is
an agreement
that does not
bring the
status of
Western Sahara
into question,
inasmuch as
“the Sahara is
already
Moroccan.”
The notion
that the
territory is
already
Moroccan and
that all that
is left to
discuss are
merely the
details of
Morocco’s
autonomy
initiative was
reiterated on
my subsequent
visits.

In
September, as
a “new idea”
to explore in
shuttle
diplomacy, my
Moroccan
interlocutors
suggested that
Algeria be
brought into
the
negotiations
in a formal
way. The
Minister of
Foreign
Affairs
reiterated
this to me
during my two
subsequent
visits,
insisting that
my priority
must be to
bring Algeria
to the
negotiating
table as a
formal party
or at least as
an “actor” and
that no
progress will
be possible
until I
succeed.
In October, as
a second “new
idea” that
could be
explored, my
interlocutors
suggested that
I ask Algeria
and the
Polisario to
provide the
legal basis of
their
positions on
self-determination.

In
November, a
major subject
of discussion
in Rabat was
the interview
that the
Minister of
Foreign
Affairs had
given to the
Spanish news
agency, EFE,
which cited
him as saying
that I could
no longer
travel to
Western
Sahara.
Various
Moroccan
interlocutors,
including the
Minister-Delegate
of Foreign
Affairs
speaking to
the British
Ambassador in
Rabat, have
suggested that
in fact I can
do so.

Clear-cut
confirmation
must await my
next proposal
to travel
there.

Turning
to my meetings
in Rabouni, my
Polisario
interlocutors
also set forth
their own
understanding
of Council
intentions,
reiterating
their
insistence
that the only
way the
Council’s call
for an
agreement that
will provide
for
self-determination
can be
implemented is
through a
referendum
with multiple
options.
However, they
expressed
their
readiness to
enter
discussions on
a more
flexible
basis, no
longer
insisting on a
referendum up
front,
assuming that
Morocco was
ready to show
like
flexibility.
This position,
which remains
to be tested,
was further
reiterated by
the
Secretary-General
of the
Polisario when
I met him late
in November.

In my
exchanges in
October, I
conveyed
Morocco’s
interest in
the
Polisario’s
position on
“self
determination”,
but my
interlocutors
dismissed this
as a further
effort to blur
the focus of
the process.
Referring to
UN General
Assembly
resolutions,
they
maintained
that the
Polisario is
in line with
the UN in this
regard and
need not
justify
itself.

While
in Rabouni, I
took the
opportunity to
enrich my
understanding
of the
realities of
life in the
refugee camps
by meeting
with
representatives
of NGOs and
Sahrawi
youth.
Young people
represent both
the potential
and the
dangers
involved in
this
conflict.
As the
prospects of
reaching a
political
solution
through
diplomacy
fade, some are
searching for
other options,
even speaking
openly about
resuming
military
action.
Indeed,
several
Polisario
leaders warned
that, while
the Polisario
remains
committed to
the UN
process,
pressure from
the military
and the
younger
generations,
in particular
during the
forthcoming
congress, may
force a change
of approach
and even bring
the ceasefire
with Morocco
into question.

In
October, I
also visited
three of the
five camps
severely hit
by rains and
subsequent
flooding.
Ms. Bolduc
will provide
details of the
widespread
damage
sustained, as
well as of the
international
effort
required to
deal with it.

Turning
now to
Algeria, the
President
received me in
November and
indicated that
his country’s
“immutable
position” of
support for
Western
Saharan
self-determination
will not
change.
He confirmed
what the
Minister of
State and
Foreign
Affairs had
stated on
earlier
occasions
reiterating
Algeria’s
refusal to
join the
negotiating
process as a
formal
party.
The Minister
of State
himself
further
rejected any
efforts to
“bilateralise”
the Western
Sahara
conflict as an
issue between
Algeria and
Morocco,
recalling that
since 1975 the
conflict has
been between
the Kingdom of
Morocco and
the Polisario
Front.

The
Minister of
State
responded to
Morocco’s
query on
self-determination
by stating
that Algeria
remains
attached to
that right as
the UN has
defined it and
that he sees
no need to
elaborate.
He did
indicate,
however, that
his country
remains ready
to assist the
parties once
they are ready
to make
progress, but
will refrain
from taking
any
initiatives
itself, since
on previous
occasions
Morocco had
interpreted
informal
exchanges on
various
possible
outcomes as
constituting
“Algerian
proposals”.

In
Nouakchott, I
met with the
Prime Minister
on two
occasions, as
well as with
the Minister
of Foreign
Affairs and
his
Minister-Delegate.
All reiterated
Mauritania’s
long-standing
position of
“positive
neutrality”
regarding the
negotiating
process.
The Prime
Minister also
warned that
the stability
of the region
could be
seriously
undermined
were the
Western Sahara
issue to
remain
unaddressed
for much
longer.

Consultations
outside the
region

Since
April, I have
also held
extensive
consultations
with
international
stakeholders.
I visited
Madrid and
Paris twice,
as well as
London and
Washington.
I am looking
forward to
visiting
Moscow
soon.

All of
these
stakeholders
have agreed
with the
Secretary-General’s
analysis
regarding the
dangerous
dynamics of
the region,
including the
need to take
the growing
frustration in
the refugee
camps
seriously.
They have also
all been very
generous in
reiterating
their support
for my
mission.
On this
occasion, I
again express
my
appreciation
for the
crucial
assistance
that the
Spanish
government
provides for
my visits to
the region by
making
available an
aircraft of
the Royal Air
Force.

Conclusion

By way
of conclusion,
I note again
that, during
my various
exchanges,
different
interpretations
of the purpose
of my mission
and the scope
of my mandate
have been
expressed.
To restore
clarity, the
Secretary-General
reiterated his
understanding
of the process
in his
statement of 4
November.
He emphasized
that the
purpose of the
negotiating
process is to
reach an
agreement on
the definitive
status of
Western Sahara
and that he
has directed
me to
intensify my
efforts to
facilitate the
entry of the
parties into
negotiations
without
preconditions
and in good
faith to
achieve a
mutually
acceptable
political
solution,
which will
provide for
the
self-determination
of the people
of Western
Sahara.
He noted that
the
discussions
that followed
the
presentation
of proposals
from Morocco
and the
Polisario in
2007 had not
led to genuine
negotiations,
and he urged
all concerned
within the
region and the
broader
international
community to
work for the
launching of
true
negotiations
in the months
to come.

This
guidance is
very
timely.
The increased
interest of
the
international
community in
addressing the
conflict over
Western Sahara
is evident and
welcome, but
much more can
be done by
means of a
sustained
effort by this
Council and
the wider
international
community to
persuade the
parties to
embark on
genuine
negotiations.

By the
same token, a
reiteration of
this Council’s
support for my
freedom of
movement, as
expressed in a
previous
meeting, will
be critical in
enabling me to
remain
familiar with
conditions in
Western Sahara
and in
preventing the
establishment
of an unsound
precedent.

I look
forward to
remaining in
touch with
Council
members as we
work together
to convince
the parties to
enter into
genuine
negotiations
without
preconditions
as soon as
possible.
Thank you."

On
December 8,
the Security
Council
meeting
scheduled
right after
Western
Sahara, about
Turkey and
Iraq, drew the
larger crowd.

This
remained true
afterward,
when
correspondents
crowded around
the
ambassadors of
Russia, Iraq
and Turkey.
Behind them,
Inner City
Press saw and
Periscoped,
France's
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
Alexis Lamek
whispered with
the Moroccan
diplomats
who'd waited
at the
stakeout, in
what's called
the Turkish
Lounge.

The
UN itself has
to some degree
dropped the
ball. Inner
City Press got
confirmed, not
from the UN,
that Ban
Ki-moon was
slated to
visit on
November 25-27
but then
canceled, so
he could go to
North Korea
(which he
ended up not
doing).
Priorities.
It's worth
noting, and we
do, that
Morocco
invited Ban
back in
November. And
now, with
Ross? Watch
this site.

After the UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
envoy on
Western Sahara
Christopher
Ross was
quoted that
Ban will
travel there
in early 2016,
Ban's
spokesman
would not
confirm it to
Inner City
Press. From
the November
24 UN noon
briefing, video here, transcript below.

On
December 7,
after UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
offered a
canned answer
on Western
Sahara, Inner
City Press
asked why Ross
hadn't gone
there, and if
Ban canceled a
visit in
November. Transcript here:

UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq: we
provided the
details of
Christopher
Ross’ recent
visit to the
region, where
he visited
Algeria,
Morocco and
Tindouf.
The way that
he proceeds
with his
travel, of
course, is
according to
his own
discretion,
and we have
defended and
continue to
defend his
right to
travel
throughout,
including to
all of Western
Sahara.
There are some
areas that he
didn't visit
this time
around, but
that, again,
like I said,
is at his
discretion,
and we will
continue to
insist upon
his freedom to
visit those
areas.

Inner City
Press: I
wanted to
follow up on
the Western
Sahara.
Given that the
Moroccan
foreign
minister was
quoted
publicly in
EFE and there
was a whole
Security
Council
meeting
basically
about that
quote, can
you… what does
it mean that
he didn't try
to go?
It seems to be
kind of a
concession
that he
couldn't go,
as many
people… some
people read
it. And
I wanted to
ask you one
separate
question.
You can answer
them both at
once.
Can you
confirm that
the
Secretary-General
was, in fact,
going to visit
Western Sahara
and had
received
Moroccan
approval in
November but,
due to his own
schedule, did
not go?

Deputy
Spokesman:
First of all,
on Christopher
Ross, as I
explained to
Ali just now,
we defend his
right to visit
throughout the
territory all
the places
that are part
of his
mandate.
This is a
mandate, mind
you, that was
given to him
by the
Security
Council, which
also has
defended his
right to
conduct his
work in
accordance
with his
mandate.
In terms of
the judgment
calls that he
makes as he
goes about his
travels, it's
his own
decisions as a
professional
diplomat to
determine how
to go about
his schedule,
but he knows,
in doing that,
that he is
free to go
where he is…
where he
intends to,
and that we
support
that.
Regarding the
Secretary-General,
no, we don't
have any plans
to visit
Western Sahara
to announce on
his behalf.

Inner City
Press:
And can
Christopher
Ross speak to
the press
after his
briefing
tomorrow?
Can you at
least ask him
for that
because there
seems to be
some
confusion.

Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
about Western
Sahara.
You gave the
readout of Mr.
Ross being in
Algeria and on
the
move.
You may have
seen it.
There’s a
report by EFE
from Algiers
saying
Christopher
Ross confirmed
on Tuesday
that UN
Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon
will visit the
territory in
the coming
months in an
attempt to
give impetus
to the peace
process.
So I know that
you’ve said… I
mean, he is
Mr.
Ross. He
is the envoy.

Spokesman:
He is Mr.
Ross.

Inner City
Press:
Was he
misquoted?

Spokesman:
I don’t know
if he’s
misquoted.
But what I can
tell you is
that any
travel by the
Secretary-General
is confirmed
from this
podium in a
statement, and
that’s what I
would say.

On
November 18,
nine days
after Inner
City Press
asked the UN
Spokesman
about
Morocco's
foreign
minister
saying UN
envoy
Christoper
Ross couldn't
or shouldn't
visit the
desert areas
of Western
Sahara, the UN
Security
Council
finally met
about it.

When
the Security
Council's
President for
November
Matthew
Rycroft of the
UK emerged
with a "Press
Element" about
the Security
Council
supporting
Ross, and
after a
question which
did not
provide any
insight into
what the
Council was
saying, Inner
City Press
asked Rycroft
to confirm
that the
Moroccan
minister's
comments, that
Ross can't
visit, had
been raised in
the Council.

Yes,
he said, and
the result is
the statement
of support for
Ross.

Inner
City Press
understands
that Security
Council member
Venezuela
raised the
issue, stating
that waiting
for Ross'
briefing in
two or three
weeks was not
good enough.
(Angola's
Permanent
Representative,
it was pointed
out, was in
Washington DC
with his
minister.)

Speaking for
Morocco, Inner
City Press is
informed, was
not its main
sponsor France
-- they like
to not be seen
in this role,
instead
using their
"implicit"
veto, here
-- but rather
Jordan. Has
Jordan been
active on the
Western Sahara
issue? Or is
this a
question of
Kingdoms?

Even
supports of
Morocco - and
Inner City
Press does
speak with
them -- have
said Morocco's
current
foreign
minister is
"not the
brightest
bulb," as one
of them put
it.

The UN has
been charged
with holding a
referendum in
Western
Sahara, but
has yet to do
it. In
October, when
there is
usually a
Security
Council
briefing about
Western
Sahara, there
was none.

Inner
City Press was
told it was
because UN
Envoy
Christopher
Ross was "in
the region."
Other sources
tell Inner
City Press the
King of
Morocco
declined to
meet with
Ross,
preferring to
wait out the
UN, or at
least under
the next
Secretary
General (and
next US
President).

Still other
sources told
Inner City
Press the King
would travel
to Western
Sahara on
November 6;
they call it a
provocation.
Inner City
Press asked UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric about
it; he said he
might have
something
later.

After the King
did visit
Western
Sahara, and as
summarized
rejected
ceding
anything
toward a
referendum;
Ban Ki-moon
said...
nothing.

Inner
City Press:
the foreign
minister of
Morocco,
Salaheddine
Mezouar, told
EFE that Mr.
Ross cannot
visit the,
quote, desert
regions of
Western Sahara
by order of
the Moroccan
Government.
So is he going
to? I
guess I want
to ask you to
tailor this
generic
statement to
the foreign
minister
saying…
[cross talk]

Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
What I'm
saying… what I
said to Ali,
which I will
repeat, is
that, while he
has no
immediate
plans to visit
Western
Sahara, he has
a right to do
so, and that
right should
not be open to
question,
whether it's
the scope of
Mr. Ross' work
and his range
of activities
are set forth
by the
relevant
Security
Council
resolutions
and the
Secretary-General.

Inner City
Press:
Right.
So… I guess
what I'm just
saying is, was
this statement
that you're
reading, this
is… you're
aware of this
Moroccan
foreign
minister
statement?

Spokesman:
You've asked
me a
question.
I've answered
it.

Inner City
Press:
Okay.

Spokesman:
My answer is a
direct
response to
the question
you've asked.

Inner
City Press: On
the Western
Sahara
statement
yesterday, two
questions.
Is the
Secretary-General
aware of a
plan by the
King of
Morocco to
actually visit
Western Sahara
on 6 November,
which many
people, some
people call it
a provocation,
some people
say it's
totally within
his rights
but…?

Spokesman:
I've seen
those press
reports.

Inner City
Press:
Is the
statement in
some way
related to
that?
What's his
message to the
King of
Morocco in
terms of
actually
going?

Spokesman:
I think the
message to
the, the
message to the
parties, I
think, is very
much in the
message.
It's not a
statement to
the King of
Morocco or to
the Front
Polisario.
It's a message
to the
partiers to
mark the
sombre
anniversary of
40 years of
unresolved
conflict.

Inner City
Press:
But is a visit
by the king at
this time
helpful to
what the
statement is
trying-- ?

Spokesman:
I think we'll…
we may have
more to say on
that later.

Inner City
Press:
Okay.
And also on
this, is it
true that Mr.
Ross, in the
course of his
journeys, has
been unable to
meet with the
King of
Morocco?

Spokesman:
I don't
know. I
will see when
his last time
was.

On
October 9 when
the UN's
Fourth
Committee took
up the
“question of
Western
Sahara," the
first order of
business was a
procedural
fight about
who could
testify, on
what request
and on what
topic. The
speakers, over
several
rounds, were
Morocco and
Senegal on the
one hand,
Algeria and
Uganda on the
other.

Uganda,
when on the
Security
Council and
otherwise,
believes there
should be a
referendum on
independence
in Western
Sahara;
Senegal
apparently
does not.

Inner City
Press ran to
cover the
dispute, but
UN Security
said it
couldn't enter
through the
main entrance
to Conference
Room 4, but to
enter the
gallery
through the UN
lobby. But
that gallery
door was
locked.
Finally from a
media booth
about the
Conference
Room, Inner
City Press filmed
and tweeted as
Moroccan
diplomats
worked the
room, running
over to speak
with Cote
d'Ivoire for
example.

After
it was
resolved - the
witness would
speak, but
should focus
on Western
Sahara - two
countries got
up and left:
Burundi and
Burkina Faso.
They had
apparently
come to
support
Morocco, or
France. They
left before
the first
speaker on
Western Sahara
(who in his
first line
called it
Moroccan
Sahara). There
will be more
sessions:
watch this
site.

There was also
testimony
about French
nuclear tests
in French
Polynesia, New
Caledonia and
several rounds
between Spain
and the UK
about
Gibraltar: is
it or is it
not a tax
haven? The
room was
emptying out.
This will be
continued.

In advance of
the Western
Sahara session
in the UN's
Fourth
Committee,
SADR Foreign
Minister Ould
Salak spoke
and took
questions at
Independent
Diplomat on
20th Street in
Manhattan on
October
8. In
his opening he
said France
uses it veto
on the UN
Security
Council to
block human
rights
monitoring.
Inner City
Press asked
him about the
denial of that
by France and
its previous
Ambassador to
the UN, now to
Washington.
Ould Salak
replied that
France uses
the “Group of
Friends” --
the P5 minus
China but plus
Spain -- so it
doesn't have
to openly use
its veto.

This puts
France's “veto
restraint”
proposals in a
different
light - but
we'll have
more on that
in a separate
story. In this
piece, written
at ID on 20th
Street, we
note that
Carne Ross
called it the
“Group of
Enemies” of
Western
Sahara, and
the worst form
of diplomacy.

AFP asked if
Ban is going
to Western
Sahara --
seems Morocco
is blocking it
(with Ban
Ki-moon, it
doesn't take
much); a
Spanish
journalists
asked about
the role of
Spain, on
which he hope
to have more.
The Security
Council was
meeting about
Haiti, with
its own
colonial
history. We'll
have more on
this.

The UN Mission
for the
Referendum in
Western
Sahara,
MINURSO, which
has yet to
hold any
referendum,
was
unanimously
"renewed" for
a year back on
April 28, 2015
by the UN
Security
Council. Inner
City Press
published
Explanation(s)
of Vote,
below.

On September
25 when UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon met
with Spain's
King Felipe
VI, the UN
said Ban
"emphasized
the need for a
renewed push
to resolve the
situation in
Western
Sahara." Full
readout below.
Ban also
raised Western
Sahara with
the President
of Mauritania.
The word
"human rights"
was not in
either
read-out.
Here's Spain:

"The
Secretary-General
met today with
H.M. King
Felipe VI of
Spain. They
discussed a
number of
global
challenges,
including
sustainable
development
and climate
change.The
Secretary-General
thanked Spain
for its
support for
the UN’s
efforts in
Libya. He also
commended
Spain for its
role in the
Security
Council.
Finally, the
Secretary-General
emphasized the
need for a
renewed push
to resolve the
situation in
Western
Sahara."

There
was some
"pool" color,
concluding
that "speaking
in English,
but hardly
audible, Ban
and the
Spanish King
mentioned the
70th
anniversary of
the United
Nations.
Felipe VI was
wearing today
a lapel pin
with the logo
of the event.
"

And
here's
Mauritania:

"The
Secretary-General
met today with
H.E. Mohamed
Ould Abdel
Aziz,
President of
the Islamic
Republic of
Mauritania.
The
Secretary-General
expressed
appreciation
for the
adoption of
the
Sustainable
Development
Goals and
requested
Mauritania’s
active support
in
implementing
the 2030
Agenda for
Sustainable
Development.

"The
Secretary–General
and President
Abdel Aziz
discussed the
security and
humanitarian
situation in
the Sahel and
the need to
enhance
regional
cooperation to
address
terrorism,
displacement,
migration and
illegal
trafficking.
The
Secretary-General
stressed the
urgency of
resolving the
question of
Western Sahara
and thanked
Mauritania for
its continued
support to the
mediation
process.
[He also
commended
Mauritania’s
efforts to
promote an
inclusive
political
dialogue in
Niger.]"

And on human
rights
monitoring?
And on Anders
Kompass?

Update:
the bracketed
final line was
removed two
hours later by
the UN.

Back in
April,
Venezuela said
human rights
monitoring
should have
been included,
and the
African Union
should have
been allowed
to address the
Council.
Angola, citing
Chad and
Nigeria as
well, echoed
this.

Afterward
Inner City
Press asked
Moroccan
Permanent
Representative
Omar Hilale a
series of
questions:
about what
Venezuela
said, about
the African
Union, injured
protesters,
and why Frente
Polisario
couldn't speak
at the same
microphone.

Hilale
asked if
Venezuela was
the right
country to
speak of human
rights.
Here now is
Inner City
Press'
transcription
of Venezuela's
explanation of
vote:

"The
Bolivarian
Republic of
Venezuela has
voted in favor
of the
resolution
renewing the
mandate of
MINURSO.
MINURSO, as we
are convinced
of its
important role
in supervising
the cease
fire, reducing
the threat of
unexploded
ordnance and
mines,
fostering
confidence
building
measures
between the
parties in
order to bring
about the
referendum,
that is in
step with the
primary
mandate in
step with
Resolution 690
of 1991. These
efforts and
the
facilitation
and the
efforts
deployed by
the Secretary
General are
aimed at
bringing about
an agreement
between the
parties.
MINURSO, to
support this,
must continue
to provide its
support to a
series of
assistance
programs aimed
at addressing
the difficult
situation
faced by the
Sahrawi
families that
are separated,
in many cases,
also breathing
a new life
into direct
negotiations
between the
Polisario
Front and
Morocco.

"However, we
wish to
express
certain
concerns over
the procedure
used in the
drafting of
the resolution
we have
adopted. We
are presented
a text that
was previously
agreed upon by
the Group of
Friends of
Western
Sahara, which
did not
address the
legitimate
concerns and
proposals that
were made by
numerous
countries that
are interested
in this issue,
Venezuela
among them.
These
proposals were
aimed at
strengthening
the role of
MINURSO and
the promotion
and protection
of human
rights of the
population in
the Western
Sahara,
bearing in
mind the
recommendations
made by the
Secretary
General in his
report and the
features of
all the UN
missions. It
is necessary,
then, that the
future
negotiation
processes on
the matter
before us sees
an improvement
in the working
methods with
the aim of
helping to
bring about a
broad
discussion
that is
inclusive and
transparent.

"In the
context of the
proposals
made, the
amendment that
sought to
increase the
regularity of
the review of
the topic by
the Council
was not taken
on board.
There is also
one aimed at
reaffirming
the
responsibilities
of this body
in bringing
about a fair
and lasting
solution to
the situation
in Western
Sahara,
through the
holding of a
referendum on
self
determination,
that would
allow for a
process of
decolonization,
a situation
that has has
lasted for
more than four
decades. It is
essential that
we ensure the
implementation
of resolution
690 of 1991,
which set
forth for,
provided for
the holding of
the
referendum.

"We are
concerned that
without a
referendum,
the process of
colonizing
Western Sahara
will continue
including the
deterioration
of human
rights for the
Sahrawi people
and the
illegal
exploitation
of their
natural
resources, all
of this to the
detriment of
stability and
peace in the
region.
Further, we
lament that
the
consultations
held on this
topic were not
proceeded by
an open
meeting in
which we could
ensure the
participation
of the special
envoy of the
African Union
for Western
Sahara, the
former
president
Joaquim
Chissano.

"In the light
of the request
from that
regional
organization
which,
together with
the United
Nations, is
facilitating
the
negotiation
process
between the
parties, it is
a paradox that
there is
exclusion from
the dialogues
in this body
of a strategic
UN ally in the
efforts to
find solutions
to conflicts
that affect
peace and
security in
the African
continent. We
hope that the
Council can
correct this
omission in
the short
term.

"To conclude,
we should like
to reiterate
the
responsibility
that this
Council has in
working with
resolve toward
a fair and
lasting
solution to
the colonial
situation
endured by the
Sahrawi
people,
solving it
with a move
towards self
determination
in including
the option of
independence
pursuant to
international
law and
working, with
resolve,
towards a fair
and lasting
solution
according to
to the
purposes and
principles of
the UN
Charter."

And from
China, as
transcribed by
Inner City
Press:

"Thank you
Madam
President.
China supports
the extension
of the mandate
of the UN
mission for
the referendum
of Western
Sahara and
hopes that the
mission will
continue to
play a
constructive
role in
stabilizing
the situation
in Western
Sahara and
assisting the
implementation
of confidence
building
measures.

China’s
position on
the question
of Western
Sahara is
consistent and
remains
unchanged.
Based on the
above, China
has voted in
favor of
Resolution
2118, adopted
by the Council
just now.
China knows
that some
Council
members have
concerns about
the
resolution.
While the
council
members were
having
consultations
on this
resolution
there should
have been more
time arranged
for it, and
there should
have been more
patience, so
as to listen
extensively to
different
opinions, and
through more
sufficient
consultations
seek a maximum
consensus and
get the widest
support. I
thank you."

UNlike
China,
Morocco's
Hilale called
the African
Union "toxic"
on this issue,
saying that
having made up
it mind the AU
should not
address the
Council.

Inner
City Press
asked how this
is different,
say, from the
European Union
addressing the
Council about
Kosovo.
(Hilale said
every
situation is
different: the
old "sui
generis").

Inner
City Press
asked why
Polisario
couldn't speak
at the UNSC
stakeout
where, for
example,
private
citizen Hilary
Clinton
recently did.
Hilale said
Hilary Clinton
is with a
member state.
But so are a
lot of people.